5 ms·
The cold war high side estimate was 50M if the West lets USSR to expend the whole of its arsenal on USA standing, doing nothing. Recent figures I read were 20M
by baybal2 5y ago
The cold war high side estimate was 50M if the West lets USSR to expend the whole of its arsenal on USA standing, doing nothing.
Recent figures I read were 20M-40M for worst case scenarios.
Realistically, a coordinated all in launch is ~1000 warheads, with 400 of them megaton scale in R36 MIRVs from West Siberia.
First strike is only possible with computerised launch infrastructure operational. Beheading the command structure is a way to prevent an effective first strike.
Without it, assorted launches get detected early, giving time for counterattack.
The missile defence can much more easily shoot down 20 boosting missiles coming one by one, than 10 missiles coming simultaneously.
- trashtester 5y agoMy numbers included the arsenals of all countries, and casualties for all reasons, including the direct blast, fallout, breakdown of infrastructure, the possibility of a nuclear winter, reduced food production, etc. Even people in areas with no nukes, little fallout and not affected by nuclear winter could face mass starvation due to lack of fertilizers, diesel, spare parts for machines, etc. Even in North America, Europe and North Asia, having the electric grids knocked out, central administrations crippled, much industry and agricultural infrastructure knocked out, followed by nuclear winter might see more people die from cold and starvation than from the nukes themselves. Anyway, I don't think we really want to test this, even if the total numbers do not fully add up to complete destruction.
- btilly 5y agoAccording to Congressional testimony from a committee they created to study the problem, a SINGLE nuclear bomb set off to maximize the EMP effect would likely kill about 2/3 of the population of the Continental USA, with possible higher estimates up to 90%. Mostly through slow painful deaths like mass starvation. Why? Because it would knock out most of our cars, electronics, payment systems, farm machinery, and everything else that we depend on to keep the supply chains our grocery stores depend on for food distribution. See https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/millions-americans-could-die-are-we-ready-emp-attack-89926?page=0%2C1 https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/millions-americans-co... for verification. I have no idea where your "worst case scenarios" come from. But they don't exactly seem "worst case" to me!
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- Retric 5y agoThose estimates where not from a single nuke. “If the lights stay off for more than a year in this country, the Commission's estimate was the loss of life would run into the tens of millions, perhaps a great deal more.” Nationwide long term total blackout is unlikely for many reasons.
- Teever 5y agoI think you underestimate the time needed to restore the entire grid if it were to be simultaneously destroyed.
- joshuamorton 5y agoSure, but the estimate there isn't "we don't restore the grid within a year" it's "the entire grid stays off for more than a year" (the whole thing is completely unrecoverable). As far as I know, your average transmission line or transformer isn't going to be broken, so the issue would be primarily power production and things that use electricity (computers etc.). We wouldn't need to restring powerlines except in places actually hit by blast waves, and the grid wouldn't be "destroyed". (and it should be further noted that this conclusion was that the US carrying capacity for life would decrease to 30m sustained by like subsistence agriculture. I expect that those deaths of hundreds of millions would be over decades, not quickly, and I really really doubt that we'd be unable to recover more than some of our agricultural capacity in a decade)
- chasd00 5y agoThey are enough slbm armed subs stalking the ocean that a clean first strike is impossible. Even if you decapitate the enemy’s command and control the subs still rise and launch a full retaliatory strike.
- csee 5y agoWhy would only 20-40M die after 1000 nukes?